240 
very carefully when we have it placed before us in print. I do not wish, 
therefore, to say anything that would tend to diminish its effect ; but I 
must express my sense of its extreme value at the present time, and especially 
with regard to two points. One is as to the very interesting parable in 
which Professor Stokes has pointed out, in so vivid a manner, that the study 
of natural and scientific laws should not stand in the way of the acceptation 
of a belief in a Divine Creator, — that to believe that God has acted 
mediately is certainly no more atheistical from a Christian point of view, 
than it is to believe that He has acted immediately. Why we cling 
so much to this idea of the immediate action of the Creator is because 
our minds are unable to grasp the conception of creation at all, and 
thus we cling to what, in fact, is a negation, because, after all, the conception 
of immediate creation is a negation. We cling to it, not because it is the 
greater thing, but because it is the less. I am not desirous of expressing 
any opinion as to the ideas some persons have indulged in with regard to 
the supposed modes of creation, such, for instance, as the doctrine of evolu- 
tion. I believe that the warning given to us against assuming to have been 
proved what, after all, is but itself a mere assumption in many cases, is one 
that is very much needed at the present time. And it should not be 
forgotten that the idea that because animalculse are bred in putrid substances, 
all living things are developed by evolution, is not a new one. I was much 
interested in coming upon a passage which I found in a queer old book of 
Paracelsus, who says that a piece of serpent which was putrifying produced 
small worms or serpents, and therefore comes to the broad conclusion 
that those small serpents, if taken care of, would grow to the full size of the 
original, from which assumption he goes on to argue that all things are 
produced by spontaneous generation, especially metals. Now 1 really and 
seriously think that in saying this Paracelsus was hardly exceeding in breadth 
of assumption some of the theories we meet with now-a-days. What we 
want is patient examination accompanied by trust and confidence in what 
we ascertain. If we can only trust to our own belief we can afford not to 
make haste, and if we can afford not to make haste, the time will come when 
all our difficulties will disappear. One may well imagine that what happened 
in the time of Galileo, — it is, perhaps a rather hackneyed allusion, but it is 
nevertheless very true, — is true of the present day ; and as we find that a 
belief in our views of astronomy in no way diminishes the firmness of our 
Christian faith or belief, why should we suppose that other modern dis- 
coveries, if they stand the test of real investigation, can do one whit more of 
injury to the truth than did the discoveries of Galileo ? 
liev. C. L. Engstrom. — I think those who were present at the last 
meeting and heard me say how very reckless Professor Clifford was in stating 
that all scientific men who were competent to judge took up the views he had 
laid down, will be glad to have had this opportunity of seeing, in the living 
reality, one than whom we know no person in Europe stands higher as a 
man of science, but who does not draw from the realms of science the same 
